Intelligent individuals have realized for some time now, that every
human weakness is open to Scrutiny. Scholars have always known
that man's foibles
can be cultivated, cared for and nurtured, in a positive way, like
one would tend a neglected garden that is overgrown with weeds.
Human weaknesses
show themselves in many different ways. The law prohibits many
of man's exploitations of the general public, which is often
geared
for personal
gains. Most individuals would not take the risk of getting caught
in a fraud however, the egos of others, often rise higher than
reality. But
the more difficult the undertaking is the larger the gain. Only
the brave
individuals became involved in the risky aspects of this business.
Snobbism is another example of a human weakness. For example, a
painter might
call himself a "Master" even though this may be a large stretching
of the truth. The possibility exists even "if' in the future this
same painter were to actually achieve a higher status and collect praise
for his work, and, in fact become a "Master "of his craft, calling
himself a "Master Painter", is like putting the cart
before the horse, and there will be many who would object to this
form of
self promotion.

This type of speculation does not risk much by flattery. It is
more difficult to refer to a Lieutenant as "General".
However, referring to someone as "dear Prince", (when
this someone does not possess the right to such title) is not only
harmless, but also brings everyone
involved much contentment and satisfaction. For instance, during
a card game, when one refers to the other using a noble title,
he or she is quite
pleased that the present company occupies such a high position
in the ranks of the society. The person who uses this new expression,
has elevated the
magnificence of his Polish friend in the foreign country, "for
the glory of Poland ". This is a glowing event. These forms
of speculations, as far as title snobbism is concerned, are most
primitive. It is not difficult
to refer to someone as "Prince". The difficulty lies
in conducting most careful research in order to prove that history
mistakenly
forgot
about the existance of 10 sons of supposedly childless Swidrygielly.
The youngest of his sons gave the beginning the Swiderski Princely
family. The history also omits the fact that the son, of also childless
Wojsielki,
the son of Mendog himself, was the forefather of the Princes' family
of
Weryha Darowskich that however signifies something and by no means
is it an easy task to undertake. Conducting successful research
requires not
only knowledge and utmost ability in the usage of the language,
but also
a certain degree of bravado and audacity. One may be accused of
misrepresentation of facts and falsification of historical events.
It has happened
before. When such circumstances arise, the accused brings forth
multitude of
paperwork and articles, which so stipulate that it is more important
to rely upon
tradition, as opposed to worthless papers or diplomas. The tradition
itself is the genuine treasure of history, tradition and only tradition.
Such
beliefs were held by those who justified title falsifications.
At the same time, the same people struggled very diligently in
their
effort
to research
the above mentioned and much despised papers and diplomas (Patent
invasions). Sometimes they reached as far back as to the time before
the partition
of Poland. Therefore we even encounter the Swedish titles of Prince
or Count. The titled ones should not be held accountable for the
fact that
the archives department failed to gather or preserve proper documentation.

Many authors of "miraculously found authentic documents" lived
in prosperity for the rest of their lives. I already mentioned the tradition.
Now the time has come to deal with the subject of Heraldic Poachers, whose
names and whose work survived to the present times. I would like to divide
them into two groups: The first group includes those who, without much
personal gain, forged documents in order to make the history of their families
more interesting and appealing. They could have truly believed in what
they created. Or, maybe they did it out of concern for their patriotic
spirit. Into this category I include Paprocki. It is not completely clear,
however, that as a historian and a person who catalogued the history of
countless noble families, Mr. Bartoz did not profit in it somehow. In the
same category of "not so guilty" Guilty, we can include Okolski,
Stupnicki, and also the author known only from his initials "G.B." (Notices
of the Principle Polish families. Dresden 1862). Last, but not
least, there is Count Seweryn Uruski, (Notices and Titles offamous
Polish
Families, Paris/Brussells, 1862). Whose considerable contribution
to Polish genealogical
literature should not be forgotten. As far as Paprocki, Okolski,
Stupnicki, and Uruski are concerned, the mitigating circumstances
in their cases
make
it possible to justify their acts. Kasper Niesiecki was a leader
in preserving the integrity of genealogical literature. When Niesiecki
decided to publish
his scrupulously gathered materials and documents it was not difficult
to find knowledgeable and affluent people who would be willing
to subsidize his project. Niesiecki was quite familiar with this
present
state of
affairs. He realized that it would be very difficult and even impossible
to be able
to present his work in a way that it could be understood. Niesiecki
realized that his goals would be achieved only at the price of
indulging human
conceit at the unfortunate but necessary expense of the truth.
Niesiecki decided
to compromise. In order to present the history in a truthful manner
(at least in the last century), be decided to start all the families
from
Cezar, Korwin, Popiel or Leszek. Niesiecki believed that it was
a relatively small
price to pay.

The nobility liked the idea of its origin from Popiel. However,
the fact that Niesiecki treated them all equally was not easy for
them
to swallow.
The nobles became quite upset. They brought a claim against Niesiecki
to the general of the Jesuits. He was prosecuted, jailed and physically
abused.
That, ultimately led to his demise. As a consequence of their actions,
Niesiecki's work was never published. Polish genealogy lost a complete
list of government officials and nobles holding positions all the
way down to the local level. Perhaps the most important work of
Niesiecki was permanently
lost. This work was included in the fifth volume of his "Herbarz".
We know very little of the oldest forgers. Krzystof Stanislaw Janikowski
(died in 1680)was, considering the time, a rather skillful paleographer.
The deception was discovered and Janikowski was exposed while he was still
alive. Then, there was the priest, Stanislaw Wojenski. He died in 1685
in wealth and prosperity, in 1661 he was the Canon of Krakow, in 1679 the
Bishop of Kamienic, and was chosen to lead a special commission in charge
of inventory of the Treasury Archives of the Crown at the castle of Kracow.
There, he planted previously falsified documents. The manuscripts, supposedly
from the 1400's dealt with certain dignities and supposedly received titles
for the family Zadorow. Exclusively all were conceived in the authors imagination.
The Wojenskis held a rightful claim to the noble origin of the family created
by Wojenski, and these titles served the families until 1930. Przybyslaw
Dyamentowski, of the clan Drya, nicknamed 'Mutyna" also became
famous by engaging in falsehoods. He was born in 1694, and died
in 1774.

Wojciech Wincenty Wieladko; Przebyslaw Dyamentowski's "copycat",
and his successor, produced the largest number of titles. Wieladko
was born in 1745 and died in 1822, as an old man in his house (Kamienica)
in
Warsaw. Towards the end of his days some people realized that Wieladko
occupied himself with creating titles for not so noble families.
Supposedly, August II bestowed the title of Count upon 14 Polish families.
Today, we
know that the king granted no such titles. A very small possibility
exists that a mistake could have been made. However, I believe that all
or almost
all of the titles were fabricated in Wieladek's little house in
Warsaw. Not in the Castle in Warsaw or the Palace in Drezno. A flood
of documents,
providing evidence as to the noble titles (Legitimization in Provincial
assemblies) appeared from 1785 to 1832 came from the office of
Mr. Wojciech. Besides many others in this group, I can include hypothetical
noble titles
of the Jezierskis, herb Rogala, Labedzkis, or Szantyrow. The above
creations did survive its author, but not for long. There were just too
many of them.
It became necessary to revise many noble books. Specially assigned
to this task, people had a better knowledge of these documents as compared
to local
delegates working with Provincial noble marshalls. Revision was
completed around 1850. Several entries were annulled. New processes of
legitimization
were requested. As a consequence, today, it would be of no use
to look for: Jezierskis, herb Rogala; Labedzkis; Szantyrow and many more
in the
official documents of titled nobility. Few families could be found
in Provincial acts, but not in part S (titled nobility) of the noble
books. As an example,
I will give you the Szantyr family that was officially excluded
from their legitimization recorded in Minsk in 1819. Not until 1848,
were they included
again; however, not into part 5, but into 1 and 4. It is not in
the family's interest to make their misfortune known to others. Today
not very many
people browse through the Provincial lists and quite a few remember
the wonderful origin traces from 1003 and uncompleted tasks of including
these
families into volume 5. It is not up to me to decide whether the
author wrote what be did in defense of the Szantyra title because he
was not familiar
with the facts or he was counting on the ignorance of the reader.
In the middle of the 19th century, we come across a Zdanowski who falsified
documents
in the Poznan archives where he worked. In the second half of the
19th century, one by the name of Leszek was quite engaged in a similar
business
in the city of Plock. I do not believe that special government
agencies in charge of investigating the legitimacy of noble titles, were
totally
free of falsifying them. With my own eyes I saw primitively falsified
passages in the grodzki Piotrowski books (later on, these same books
served as a
source for official documents) what contributed to a significant
increase in the number of Polish nobility. J.N. Bobrowicz's colleague,
Ludwik Zielinski
(they worked together during the second edition of Niesiecki) does
not have a clean conscience either. It is a special case when one's crime
of
document falsification was not solved in a timely manner, and,
therefore, there is practically no chance to know the identity
of its perpetrator.
During the publication years of "Heroldia" (in Warsaw),
someone stole blank forms from its office files attesting that
the process of conformation of noble descent was conveyed
in a proper and legitimate manner. If things were not bad enough,
all
of the stolen
forms had an "in blanco" signature of the Heroldia 's
director. As a consequence of his frequent absences and in order
to prevent delays
in issuing the diplomas, the Director would sign blank forms. Without
his signature the documents had no legal value. The signed form
was subsequently
given a name of a person, who obtained conformation of noble descent;
and a corresponding clan sign painted or imprinted on it as well.
A priest,
Antoni Szlagowski was quite surprised when in the 1930's, he realized
that the document (obtained from his father) which proclaimed noble
origin of
the Szlagowski family did not exist in the acts of the former Heroldia
and his name is not included in the list of the Nobility of the
Polish Kingdom. He decided to investigate. What he found out (from
the people
in the Archives of the ancient records in Warsaw, located at #1
Jezuicka St.) is that a skillful middle man, in order to save himself
some time
and avoid going through the processes, presented (for a "suitable
fee) the Szlagowski family history with false documentation. This
document stated that the family's noble origin was determined accordingly
with the
rules of due process. It is clear that, as far as the above example
is concerned, it would be unjust to blame the members of the Szlagowski
family
for this unfortunate incident. I do not know how many documents
which originated in a similar manner still exist. The chances are
that many falsified documents
were destroyed during World War II. If not they continue to rest
in private archives of many families. Those families do not realize
that the documents
portrayed by them as something important and priceless are nothing
more than a piece of paper. The knowledge of paleography was not
wide spread,
therefore, the business of fabricating documents was blooming.
The only thing required was an imagination. The rest was relatively
easy. No one
ever checked the penmanship style of the document or the ink it
was written with. No one even compared the handwriting of the entry,
with the one that
existed above or below. Today, document forgers encounter numerous
obstacles and difficulties. However, the "blind" faith
of some people remained just the same when Baron "X" or
Prince "Y" receives
the joyful news that a famous heraldic researcher (or antiquarian)
found a very interesting document, which beyond any doubt acknowledges
and
verifies the noble origin of this, or that, family.

Ludgard Grochoiski could serve as the best example. The damage
inflicted upon the genealogical knowledge was most substantial.
His publication, "Herold",
and other organizations created by him, in Warsaw, could be seen
as a well of information about what damage could be done as a result
of illegitimate
relationships between erudition and fantasy. In a few hundred years,
it will be impossible to determine where the truth ends, and the
fiction begins.
Grocholski was not alone. One of his collaborators was Jan Godziemba
Maleszewski Maleszewo. He wrote in Herold under many aliases and
his forgeries could
be seen as most detrimental. The accurate assessment of Herold
and the included articles, given Professor Dworzaczek in Geneologia,
page 128 and,
before him, Leon Bialkowski in his work about traditions. Grochoiski
and his group were the masters of fraud. However, there were others
whose "work" and
the damage it inflicted was comparably smaller. There was S. Starykon
Kasprzycki whose "Encyclopedia of Polish Nobility" is
nothing less than a disgrace to genealogical research; and there
was S.Szydlowski and a few
others. Historians of their own families belong to a separate grouping.
The most primitive author of monographs is "Prince" Aleksander
Weryha (actually Darowski) and his work "Princely families
of Weryhow",
Warsaw 1937. "Count" Wlodzimierz Bern deCosban, to a
great extent, defended the non existing title of the Bern family.
Consequently, he was
greatly ridiculed. He was the author of (among other things) a
funny little brochure, the text of which could be quite amusing
to a historian. Aleksander
Wlodarski, an archivist from Warsaw, editor of "Family Armorials",
(hr.S. Uruski) and a large number of monographies does not deserve
to be remembered as a truthful human being either. He was the person
in charge
of publication of the 15 volume armorial, "RODZINA. I Ierbarz
Szlachly Polskiej".

The works of Edward Redziejowski and Ludwig Korwin inflicted comparably
less damage. As far as Redziejowski's work is concerned, it becomes
quite clear after reading only a few pages of his work, that we
are dealing
with total ignorance. As far as Kowrin, his work seems to serve
with bias. A
large number of foreign authors, summoned by our own specialists
of falsification, could also be charged with "pollution" of
Polish genealogy. In this category we can include the little known
French Armorials. Besides
the monographs of Arnebert, Brissac, Caraman Chimay, and others,
we have genealogies of Bem deCosban, Bielski, Gizycki, Gubrynowicz,
Jablonowski,
Montresor and Swidrygiello Swiderski. The imagination required
from writing such works is truly admirable. It is not a coincidence
that
the representatives
of all seven families were Herolida 's close friends.(Heroldia
Heraldic Institute on Saska Kepa in Warsaw)

"
The Armorial of the Princely and Countly families ofPoland" Groningue
1897, authored by Le Comte de Saint Obin is simply a collection
of the absurd. In the last years, a noble title was bestowed upon the
Wisniewski
/Wiszniewski
family a family of counts and princes were supposed descendants
of a dynasty that originated in the year 550AD, by Prus, the first (the
dynast ruled
in Prussian Poland) Among a number of distinguished members of
that family we have King Michal Wisniowiecki,(yes!) [his name was added
on later].
Also the dates confirming that the title of prince was given to
the family "by
the Polish King in 1783" was mentioned there. I do not know
who gave them the title of Prussian Princes on December 16, 1861.
As the last entry
in this "fantasy list" there is an Austrian title of
the count given to Tadeusz Wisniewski on March 13, 1877. This entry
is genuine. Each
and every piece of information can be found on pages 85 & 86
of the "Annual
of the French Nobless", 1939 1950" published in 1951
in Paris. This same family is mentioned on page 97 in "International
rRegister of Nobility" (Brussells, 1955) published under the
direction of de F. Koller. Mr. Koller had deprived the Wisniewski
family of the protoplast
from 550. All other bright elements including King Michal and the
family's dynastic origin were not disputed. He described the family
shield: (the
Prussian, yes) over all an escutcheon red, with a cross and a half,
surmounted of a royal crown. The well recognized publishing house
of Gotajski's Almanac
had its own wrong doing on its conscience as well. Professor Dworzaczek
had already discussed numerous inaccuracies and errors, made by
the above institution. Therefore, there is no need for me to do
so. I will mention
on the case of the "Gotha" of Counts from 1862. On page
654 there is the monograph (invalid and erroneous) of the Pilawa
Potockis
and, after
it, just like after the Trojan horse, there are totally implausable
monographs of the Potocki's of the Lis clan, (page 664) and the
Rostworowski's (page
725).

As far as the Almanac de Got/ia in all of its categories: Princes,
Counts or Barons, there is a need to emphasize the fact that the
genealogies
of the last generations are portrayed in an accurate and truthful
manner. However,
the information about the historical origin of each and every family
as
well as the mentioned titles of the "marriage connected" individuals
must be considered with utmost caution and skepticism. Therefore, the names
of the most prominent persons, and the dates of obtained titles, by them,
or the titles of those who married a princess, countess, or baroness have
to be cautiously viewed in a similar manner. I will not mention here the
numerous mistakes made by the authors of our Armorials, (Zychlinski and
A.A. Kosinski [Golden Book of Polish Nobility], because much more renowned
writers such as Baron Artur Reyski or Wlodzmierz Dworzaczek already dealt
with that subject. "The Genealogical Handbook of Nobility" (C.A.
Stark Verlag, Limburg or D.Lahn) which endorses the ambitions or
moral beneficiaries of the formal publishings of J. Perthes (Almanach
de Got/ia),
but it also includes the monographs of Polish families.

The latter ones are quiet uneven. Besides principal families, it
also includes the genealogy of the Tyszkiewicz family, which could
serve as
a perfect
example of how monographs are not supposed to be written. In one
of the later volumes (1965), the genealogy of Potocki's clan Pilawa
was included.
Unfortunately, many of the same mistakes were repeated as they
were in previously described Gotha Grabiowski from 1862. Separate
groups
of document
forgers are made up of priests. Bad faith was not usually the reason
behind their actions. When a proud father of a baptized child who,
at the same
time just happened to be the great benefactor of a small village
church, requested that the word "Generosus" or "Magnj'Icus" were
put before the child's name in the certificate of baptism. How could a
priest refuse such a request? Denying such a request could result in alienating
the benefactor. The consequences are quite obvious and the priest would
not want that to happen. Therefore, the words "Generosus" or
Magnificus" could not be seen as an undisputable proof of
noble descent.

Lugard Grochoiski, always filled with initiatives, came up with
an idea of obtaining physical proofs of noble descent. Yes, the
same
physical
(paper) proofs he fought against so frequently on other occasions.
It is common
knowledge that if such proofs do exist it is not worth much. However,
if it does exist, it may become quite useful. When such a document
in some
unexplained way, falls in the hands of a person, it is more than
certain that this person will complain about some "paper titles" no longer.
Aleksander Wlodarski, an employee of The State Archives, helped establish
a new precendent. From the State Archives, legally confirmed for its accuracy,
for consistancy in selections, from using old Latin words ("is) in
which the last name of the client had the ear pleasing word placed before
it: "comes". So far everything is legal and officially permitted.
The next stage of the process had to do with the translation of the above
document from Latin into the Polish language. The translator was compelled
to substitute the Polish word "hrabia" [Count] for the Latin
word "comes". Today, we realize that the meaning of this word
was quite different. The person translating the document saw the Polish
word "hrabia" as the only one serving the purpose of the translation.
Newly translated "versions" of the document (legally approved
by the appropriate administration)was taken by Grochoiski (or a person
appointed by him) to Paris where the Polish Embassy or the Consulate General
gave an accurate translation (confirmation of translated agreement) of
the word "hrabia" to "comte"(this time into the French
language). Next, the French official document was sent to Madrid (because
it was already approved by a proper Polish authority). At the time the
person in charge of Heroldia in Spain was an elderly individual. The document
was presented to him and subsequently sent back to Poland. Attached was
a note stating that the existance and content of the document was properly
acknowledged and that the Polish family "X," existing as early
as the 150' century with its proper title, is now officially registered
in the Archives in Madrid. In this way, or another, the "Princely" Jablonowski
family (one should not confuse it with the famous but extinct family bearing
the same name) was registered in Madrid on December 24, 1927. The families
of Bielski (May 29,, 1928) and Swidrygiello swiderskich (July 26, 1928)
followed in the similar manner. Also the Baron family of deGubry Gubrynowiczow
de Mengen was catalogued on April 18, 1928. W. Dworzaczek mentions the
latter family in his "Genealogia" on pages 128 & 147. I am
not entirely certain whether or not additional families were not approved
in a similar way. I do know, however, about others that were not successful
in their attempt. The reason behind their failure was the Polish Consul
General in Paris. The frequency of confirmation requests, for middle ages,
acts arose his suspicion. The scheme became clear to him subsequent requests
for confirmations were firmly rejected. Multiple interventions were of
no avail. Then, the war in Spain had begun and the dispute ended. Against
all odds the case came to life again after the last war. The instigator
was Count Chebda de Cienie Cienski. He registered his "Piast Title"in
the College of Arms in London. Either after, or shortly before
him Zbigniew Belina Prazmowski registered his, middle age, title
of Baron
in Edynburg.
Prazmowski left no son and heir, therefore his title became extinct
after his death.